Talk:Star Trek: Phase II
The talk page of Xon (article was merged with this) is archived here: Talk:Star Trek: Phase II/Xon ---- I have quite a lot of Phase II images at my website. See http://www.robsacc.nl/ottens/conceptart.html here. Should I include it as an External Link? Ottens 22:19, 30 Jun 2004 (CEST) :I guess it should. ;) Ottens 22:49, 30 Jun 2004 (CEST) Could we make some sort of list of episodes planned for Phase II but used for TNG in stead? Perhaps we could add a small note (later TNG: "Episode") to the short descriptions already in the article. -- Redge 15:20, 24 Jul 2004 (CEST) :I thought there were only two of those, and there it has been mentioned... Ottens 16:02, 24 Jul 2004 (CEST) ::Sorry, I misseed that. I'll just make some links directly to the episodes themselves, makes wikisurfing a lot easier. -- Redge 16:24, 24 Jul 2004 (CEST) writers/director guide i have a star trek II guide from 1977. any value to it? The McQuarrie Enterprise To say that this was a design for Phase II is misleading. McQuarrie's concepts were for the abandoned Planet of the Titans film which really had very little whatsoever to do with the series that was planned later. Jefferies updates to the original series design were always what was intended to be used for Phase II. IIRC, this can be verified by the Reeves-Stevenses' Star Trek: Phase II - The Making of the Lost Series. Unfortunately, similarly-misleading captions in their Art of Star Trek and the subsequent repetition of such misnomers as "Phase II prototype" on EAS have added to the confusion. Before erasing someone's work by deleting the information and images regarding the design from the article, however, I wanted to get some discussion going about maybe creating a separate article for Planet of the Titans or otherwise revising the format.--The Mighty Monkey of Mim 11:28, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC) "Elements Perhaps Used…" What sort of proof do we have that any of the Phase II scriptwork got used for TNG episodes like "Genesis," "Angel One," or "Peak Performance"? It reads like someone decided to try REALLY HARD to match up the episodes to TNG ones that really had little or no connection. Unless we have a source somewhere that says, "I wrote this episode, and I stole some elements from this Phase II script," it really has no business being there. I'll leave it for a while, but I'm going to delete those additions if there isn't some real discussion to convince me otherwise. —SavMan 04:20, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC) Moved from Vfd Xon. Okay, I can tell this ones gonna cause a stir. The fact is, in canon trek, Xon, never existed, if we keep the article than all other info in unproduced scripts and cut scenes are canon too. The info is important, and should be placed into the phase II page, but it can't exist on its own.Jaz 22:24, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC) * Keep-- only on account of the fact that we allow many other useful cut script references (ex. the second USS Reliant, USS Hawk and much much more). At least in this case there is proof a character existed, and not just a mere line removed from the script. Must less the fact this page is over a year and a half old. --Alan del Beccio 00:09, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) *'KEEP'. The article is about a completely legitimate subject. Memory Alpha is supposed to be an encyclopedia to the Star Trek franchise, therefore all aspects must be covered. -- Krevaner 01:03, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) :*But in canon it appears that Xon never existed, and instead we have Sonak, the new science officer killed in a transporter accident. I'm not saying he shouldn't be mentioned, but if we want to keep him, the rest of our policy must change. He was not in any of the categories listed as acceptable sources at Memory Alpha:Canon Policy, and is therefor the equivilant of a non-canon character. Jaz 01:25, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) * Merge. I believe Jaz is right. This is not a cut reference from an otherwise valid resource, it's information from the never produced Phase II. Unless we change our Canon policy to include that, I suggest to merge that on a production POV article about Phase II, just like non-canon characters from novels are handled. -- Cid Highwind 01:33, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) * Redirect to Star Trek: Phase II and merge, similar to what was done for Nicole Janeway. I think the unique nature of Xon's character and the fact that it's so well known warrants at least that much. -- SmokeDetector47| TALK 02:29, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) Keep, we have articles on actors even though most if not all of them are never brought up in the Canon. WE reference, non canon tech manuals, so why can't we reference the fact that they had written, and cast an actor/character that was not used. He is non canon, but it is a part of Star Trek History. --TOSrules 03:21, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) *You have admitted he's non-canon, and since he's clearly not a real person, he does not, by our own policy, deserve a page. If you have a problem with this deletion, your issue is with the policy, not this incident. Jaz 03:25, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) *Hmmm... I think it would be best to move the info from this article into Star Trek: Phase II, keeping Xon itself as a redirect to that page (or perhaps even to Sonak), as SmokeDetector47 recommended above. This character is no different that Nicole Janeway, and should be treated the same. --From Andoria with Love 03:41, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) *I like this character, so I'm not sure. I guess Merge and Redirect to Phase II seems appropriate, but not Sonak.--Tim Thomason 08:33, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) *'Comment'. Jaz is right again. May I remind everyone that this page is not the place to discuss policy, just the place to decide if actions regarding a page are valid according to existing policy? And according to our , the issue is clear. -- Cid Highwind 11:38, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC) :*To further my point, if we take this for face value, it means we also have to accept every other Phase II script as canon. Most of you know that TNG episodes "Devil's Due" and "The Child" are re-writes of unused Phase II scripts. If we accept phase II as cannon, we are admitting that both Deanna Troi and Ilia were inpregnated by identicle alians, had identicle outcomes, and almost identicle dialogue, and that the planet Ventax II was twice conned by Ardra, only to be rescued by both Kirk on the original enterprise, and then Picard, 100 years later, in the exact same situation, on the Ent-D. Now do you understand why this page must go? Jaz 06:08, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC) *Could an Admin kindly merge the page? Jaz 22:42, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC) **'Merged' with Star Trek: Phase II. -- Cid Highwind 22:53, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC) Brouching and scraling? I know this is totally off-topic, but I can't find a better place to ask. The description for the episode "Savage Syndrome" refers to the crew "brouching and scraling at each other." Can anyone clarify what those two words mean? --Jed H (24.6.48.199 17:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)) Is this written correctly this is about the illia section :Her face is breathtakingly beautiful. But like all Deltans, she is completely hairless except for the eyes ?????? -- :That is what Gene Roddenberry and Jon Povill wrote. What is the particular problem? --OuroborosCobra talk 04:42, 1 October 2006 (UTC) ::It does seem odd, but I believe that they were referring to eyelashes, and possibly eyebrows. It is a bit of an odd way to write it, but that's the way that they wrote it 20+ years ago. -- Sulfur 12:17, 1 October 2006 (UTC)